Jump to content
Lady Winter Rose

Will Jon be Dany's heir

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Fire Eater said:

As to who would call it, I don't know, but I don't think Catelyn's suggestion in ACoK is just a one off. The Great Council is an assembly of all the lords, all those who command the military power of Westeros. The winning candidate has the majority of the lords on his side. A decision by the Great Council has never been overturned. Cersei wouldn't accept the result if she lost, but the power balance would be against her.

A grand total of what, three Great Councils? Rhaenyra expressly refused to call a Great Council when asked by Alicent, on grounds that Great Council would have been likely to support Alicent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

I meant as in people in private believe it. They don't say so publicly out of the obvious fear of getting punished. 

Or because it would be against their political interests/ambitions. The Tyrells don't give a fig who Joff's/Tommen's true father was. Olenna believes it was Jaime, but it would be nonsensical to go down that road if that means Stannis gets the throne.

8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

The KG are required to guard the king, and their vows would have required them to go to Dragonstone to protect the royal family if Jon was a bastard. They didn't need to be there as Dayne's family could have looked after Lyanna without the Kingsguard. Why didn't they have Dayne's family look after her so they could go to Dragonstone? No public explanation has been offered so far.

There is no indication that their vows required them to do anything but obey their commands. The KG are not king-creating or king-searching machines. If Rhaegar told them to take care of his mistress, wife, bastard, child, dog, etc. in the middle of a war then they would have been obliged to do that. Just as Rickard Thorne and Willis Fell abandoned Aegon II and took it upon themselves to protect his son and daughter respectively. Willis Fell got Jaehaera to Storm's End - and never decided to go out and search for his king thereafter who he knew was out there somewhere without KG protection.

Viserys III was safe enough on Dragonstone, surrounded by a vast fleet and loyal men like Darry. The KG were in no need nor in any hurry to go there.

8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

His marriages weren't dissolved or declared illegitimate, meaning they were recognized.

Maegor's marriages are, in the end, irrelevant to any discussion considering that they did not lead to offspring. The interesting question is what Westeros would have thought of any child born by one of Maegor's later wives after Maegor's death - would it have been seen as a trueborn child or as a bastard? We don't know. Aegon the Conqueror's second son was only born when he was monogamous again.

And it is quite clear that Prince Maegor's second marriage was not accepted by anyone in Westeros besides the Harroways.

8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

It seems you missed what I pointed out up thread: his grandfather Jaehaerys II and Shaera married without their father Aegon IV's permission, and Rhaenyra and Daemon married without her father, Viserys I's permission either. Rhaegar has precedent for eloping with Lyanna without royal permission. 

The issue is that Rhaegar had no permission by his royal father to take on a second wife. A king can do that as Maegor proved - he can force the Faith to conduct such marriages - but there is no precedent for a polygamous Targaryen prince.

If you are unmarried you can marry in secret and their parents - royal or not - can be made to accept this. But if Daemon or Jaehaerys had taken a second wife in their secret marriages without permissions, things would be different. Because it is quite clear that the proper marriage vows in Westeros do not allow for polygamy. They explicitly forbid it.

8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

As to who would call it, I don't know, but I don't think Catelyn's suggestion in ACoK is just a one off. The Great Council is an assembly of all the lords, all those who command the military power of Westeros. The winning candidate has the majority of the lords on his side. A decision by the Great Council has never been overturned. Cersei wouldn't accept the result if she lost, but the power balance would be against her. 

Cat's suggesting rests on the willingness of the pretenders to actually take a step back and allow others to assess their claims - sort of like Euron does when he shows up at the Kingsmoot rather than insisting he already is king (as he did earlier, when he seized the Seastone Chair). But without a king or a Hand actually calling and presiding over such a council it wouldn't be worth if not everybody showed up there for some reason. And such a thing is very unlikely to happen in war.

But, sure, technically Stannis, Renly, Cerse/Tywin, Robb/Cat, Balon, etc. could have agreed to do something like that.

8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

Why would Daenerys ignore or reject evidence that Jon is legitimate so that she can legitimize him? That makes no sense.

Oh, I'm sure Jon is going to need some Targaryen blessing to be seen as such. Even a dragon won't be enough, just as a dragon didn't make any of the dragonseeds a Targaryen or Velaryon. He just doesn't look the part. And stories are just stories. And all *proof* there will ever be about *Jon Snow* are going to be stories.

But if a Targaryen - be it Dany or Aegon - makes a public show out of believing those stories, actually naming and acknowledging *Jon Snow* as *X Targaryen* then he is going to enter the family. Without something like that he is not going to be able to make such a connection.

You can turn it around and imagine what the North would think if Brandon Stark had secretly married and hidden a son of his down in the south somewhere, a son with a story and looking like a Lannister or Targaryen. Do you think the North would accept and acknowledge him as a Stark if Bran, Rickon, Sansa, Arya, etc. wouldn't publicly make it clear that they believe and accept this story?

I don't think so.

8 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

Daenerys's views don't change millennia of laws, precedent and tradition. Legitimacy matters in this political environment. A dragon alone isn't enough to give one legitimacy as Hugh the Hammer and Maegor demonstrated. Drogon doesn't understand secession, but the realm does. Daenerys would put out the claim that Aegon is fake when she lands, or why else would she fight against her supposed late brother's son, whose murder she regarded as a great crime? 

She can also fight Aegon on the grounds that Aerys II legal and chosen successor was Viserys III, and Viserys III's legal and chosen heir was she, Daenerys Stormborn, the Princess of Dragonstone.

Princes born outside of castles whose identity is concealed by 'well-meaning' relatives do lose their claims if they don't know who they are. That's the way of such things. That goes for Aegon (who even pretended he was dead for nearly twenty years) and for Jon Snow.

People don't change their political allegiances and ambitions just because hidden princes suddenly decide to come forth. They go along with what they actually believed and what looks promising to them.

Jon Snow should look promising for no Targaryen loyalists in Westeros. It will be Aegon or Daenerys. And Jon might actually lose all his Stark supporters (assuming he ever has some of them) if he were to play the 'I'm Rhaegar's son' card. Rhaegar's son has no claim to Winterfell or the North.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Jon Snow should look promising for no Targaryen loyalists in Westeros. It will be Aegon or Daenerys. And Jon might actually lose all his Stark supporters (assuming he ever has some of them) if he were to play the 'I'm Rhaegar's son' card. Rhaegar's son has no claim to Winterfell or the North.

He has a remote one. Through Lyanna. A Brandon once left North to his daughter´s bastard... but we haven´t heard that song sung in North, only beyond the Wall. Lyanna´s son, if legitimate or a legitimized bastard, is more clearly behind Sansa (and her Lannister offspring) and Arya (and her Bolton offspring) than Eddard´s bastard by Wylla was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaak said:

He has a remote one. Through Lyanna. A Brandon once left North to his daughter´s bastard... but we haven´t heard that song sung in North, only beyond the Wall. Lyanna´s son, if legitimate or a legitimized bastard, is more clearly behind Sansa (and her Lannister offspring) and Arya (and her Bolton offspring) than Eddard´s bastard by Wylla was.

I'm using hyperbole. No claim stronger than Lord Eddard's sons and daughters. Not to mention that Westerosi practices don't seem to favor claim combinations - Jon could either claim the North and Winterfell or the Seven Kingdoms and the Iron Throne. Not both.

In addition, if he were legitimized per Robb's decree as Jon Stark, son of Eddard, heir to King Robb - and Ned's actual children and the North ended up supporting this thing - then they are not likely to shout 'Hooray - hail the true king of everything!' - if it came out that Brandon, Rickon, Sansa, or Arya had to (temporarily) give up their claims because they believed their cousin was their brother.

Such a revelation could cost him much support, even in the North, if it were seen as deception. And since Howland has Robb's will right now, presumably, it might be seen as deception if he has Jon legitimized as Robb's brother and Ned's son.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Jaak said:

A grand total of what, three Great Councils? Rhaenyra expressly refused to call a Great Council when asked by Alicent, on grounds that Great Council would have been likely to support Alicent.

But when it was called, the decision was never refuted. It wouldn't have supported Alicent since she has no claim, but Aegon II. 

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Or because it would be against their political interests/ambitions. The Tyrells don't give a fig who Joff's/Tommen's true father was. Olenna believes it was Jaime, but it would be nonsensical to go down that road if that means Stannis gets the throne.

There is no indication that their vows required them to do anything but obey their commands. The KG are not king-creating or king-searching machines. If Rhaegar told them to take care of his mistress, wife, bastard, child, dog, etc. in the middle of a war then they would have been obliged to do that. Just as Rickard Thorne and Willis Fell abandoned Aegon II and took it upon themselves to protect his son and daughter respectively. Willis Fell got Jaehaera to Storm's End - and never decided to go out and search for his king thereafter who he knew was out there somewhere without KG protection.

Viserys III was safe enough on Dragonstone, surrounded by a vast fleet and loyal men like Darry. The KG were in no need nor in any hurry to go there.

That too.

It's literally in the name: Kingsguard. LC Hightower himself said "You swore a vow to guard the king not to judge him." The KG was founded specifically by Visenya, when the Dornish were sending assassins against Aegon, to protect the king. Regarding Rickard Throne and Willis Fell's case, it was part of a plan to keep the king safe, and they knew the king was safe as no one else knew his whereabouts. The war wasn't over yet. Whereas, the current situation with the three KG wasn't the plan. Viserys and the rest of the royal family on Dragonstone weren't in hiding, and their enemies clearly knew where they were, and they had lost the war with the remaining Targaryen loyalists dipping their banners. 

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Maegor's marriages are, in the end, irrelevant to any discussion considering that they did not lead to offspring. The interesting question is what Westeros would have thought of any child born by one of Maegor's later wives after Maegor's death - would it have been seen as a trueborn child or as a bastard? We don't know. Aegon the Conqueror's second son was only born when he was monogamous again.

And it is quite clear that Prince Maegor's second marriage was not accepted by anyone in Westeros besides the Harroways.

His marriages were accepted, and so by extension, any children he would have had through them would have been accepted as legitimate. As for Aegon, his son Aenys was by his likely second wife, Rhaenys. 

Aenys threatened for him to either set Alys aside or go into exile. Maegor went into exile, meaning his marriage to Alys wasn't invalidated. Maegor still had the precedent set by his father. 

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The issue is that Rhaegar had no permission by his royal father to take on a second wife. A king can do that as Maegor proved - he can force the Faith to conduct such marriages - but there is no precedent for a polygamous Targaryen prince.

If you are unmarried you can marry in secret and their parents - royal or not - can be made to accept this. But if Daemon or Jaehaerys had taken a second wife in their secret marriages without permissions, things would be different. Because it is quite clear that the proper marriage vows in Westeros do not allow for polygamy. They explicitly forbid it.

Aegon married both his sisters before he was even crowned by the High Septon. Maegor took a second wife before he was crowned, and as I pointed out, his marriage wasn't technically invalidated as far as we know. As for Westerosi wedding vows, followers of the Old Gods have practiced polygamy from King Garland II of the Reach, Lord Lymond Hightower and King Ronard of Storm's End to Ygon Oldfather in the present. Blackfyre supporters also say that Aegon IV promised Daemon he could take Daenerys as a second wife, meaning there was some level of acceptance. 

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Cat's suggesting rests on the willingness of the pretenders to actually take a step back and allow others to assess their claims - sort of like Euron does when he shows up at the Kingsmoot rather than insisting he already is king (as he did earlier, when he seized the Seastone Chair). But without a king or a Hand actually calling and presiding over such a council it wouldn't be worth if not everybody showed up there for some reason. And such a thing is very unlikely to happen in war.

But, sure, technically Stannis, Renly, Cerse/Tywin, Robb/Cat, Balon, etc. could have agreed to do something like that.

 What about after the War for Dawn where much of the pretenders have been killed by then leaving maybe at most 2-3? 

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, I'm sure Jon is going to need some Targaryen blessing to be seen as such. Even a dragon won't be enough, just as a dragon didn't make any of the dragonseeds a Targaryen or Velaryon. He just doesn't look the part. And stories are just stories. And all *proof* there will ever be about *Jon Snow* are going to be stories.

But if a Targaryen - be it Dany or Aegon - makes a public show out of believing those stories, actually naming and acknowledging *Jon Snow* as *X Targaryen* then he is going to enter the family. Without something like that he is not going to be able to make such a connection.

You can turn it around and imagine what the North would think if Brandon Stark had secretly married and hidden a son of his down in the south somewhere, a son with a story and looking like a Lannister or Targaryen. Do you think the North would accept and acknowledge him as a Stark if Bran, Rickon, Sansa, Arya, etc. wouldn't publicly make it clear that they believe and accept this story?

I don't think so.

Yes, I think Daenerys would need to recognize him for him to be truly accepted. The public story, not the actual story mentioned in a footnote by Mushroom, regarding Addam Velaryon was that mounting a dragon proved his Velaryon heritage. That could provide some precedent as it would prove Jon has blood of the dragon. It couldn't have come from the Stark side, and they have no knowledge of who Jon's mother is. Wylla might provide testimony, Howland Reed as well and maybe Ashara if she is still alive. 

In the case you mentioned, it wouldn't be accepted, as there is nothing said to be special about people of Stark descent like blood of the dragon that allows them to mount dragons. The story usually has a hero prove his heritage through some seemingly impossible feat. 

15 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

She can also fight Aegon on the grounds that Aerys II legal and chosen successor was Viserys III, and Viserys III's legal and chosen heir was she, Daenerys Stormborn, the Princess of Dragonstone.

Princes born outside of castles whose identity is concealed by 'well-meaning' relatives do lose their claims if they don't know who they are. That's the way of such things. That goes for Aegon (who even pretended he was dead for nearly twenty years) and for Jon Snow.

People don't change their political allegiances and ambitions just because hidden princes suddenly decide to come forth. They go along with what they actually believed and what looks promising to them.

Jon Snow should look promising for no Targaryen loyalists in Westeros. It will be Aegon or Daenerys. And Jon might actually lose all his Stark supporters (assuming he ever has some of them) if he were to play the 'I'm Rhaegar's son' card. Rhaegar's son has no claim to Winterfell or the North.

Aerys's decree was made before Daenerys was born (she was born after he died), and didn't mention her, it referred only to Viserys. While Rhaenyra had her father's proclamation and will specifically naming her his heir, Daenerys didn't. Tradition and precedent would have the male heir supersede the female heir. While in the case of Viserys I and Rhaenys, and Daena and Viserys II, the female claimant had a stronger claim through primogeniture, the male claimant became king. In this case, it is male claimant having a stronger claim through primogeniture. I think Daenerys would fight Aegon knowing he is fake, as I doubt she would knowingly fight her own late brother's remaining child. 

Not all are ambitious in the vein of Mace Tyrell. People are interested in some form of legitimacy.

That isn't fair, given most Targaryen loyalists don't even know Jon exists. The Northmen would be more likely to believe it coming from Ned's companion, Howland Reed. Reed has no reason to lie. You think the Stark supporters would abandon Ned's nephew who was raised by Ned himself in the North, and supported the fight against the Boltons and aided the Stark heirs?

It does sound impossible, I know, but in this series, the impossible can become possible, like hatching stone dragon eggs. Jon will eventually be accepted as king, or what point is there to giving him a secret royal heritage and with plenty of hints and Arthurian references if it isn't going to have a significant impact on the storyline?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2018 at 9:58 PM, Fire Eater said:

I meant as in people in private believe it. They don't say so publicly out of the obvious fear of getting punished. 

On 11/12/2018 at 10:17 PM, Jaak said:

Some people do. Most(at least those of import), apparently do not. Hell even Davos asks Stannis why exactly should anyone believe his claim, and accidentally refers to Joffery as Stannis’ nephew. He believes Stannis, of course but even he(a Stan fanatic), is not entirely buying his story.Hell, we even see in Alyanne Martel’s head, she doesn’t actually believe Marcella to be a bastard of inchest -and she hates the Lannisters.  Hell not even the faith militant are pressing this claim of inchest. Even when they’re disrespecting the royal family. Stannis’ twincest story just seems like the half-baked story a man gives when trying to usurp his brother’s children’ Throne. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to doubt Jon Snow will believe the story of his parentage himself. Even if does he'll know it would foolish to go around spreading it. If the Ned thought it should stay secret than he'll most likely agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

I'm starting to doubt Jon Snow will believe the story of his parentage himself. Even if does he'll know it would foolish to go around spreading it. If the Ned thought it should stay secret than he'll most likely agree.

That's not really the case, what's the point of it if it's not going to spread?, Jon will most likely believe it if Howland Reed slap it to his face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2018 at 6:18 PM, Lollygag said:

 

One thing I’m really looking forward to is Dany and Jaime. Jaime’s right hand killed Aerys, and Jaime in turn lost his right hand. On the face of it, it’s not equal. But Aerys was off the rails, and Jaime lost his identity with his hand. I think whether Dany calls it even or not will say a lot about her. If thy hand offends thee...

 

 

 

 

1

I had never considered this, but I love the idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NelyafinweMaitimo said:

I had never considered this, but I love the idea. 

Works with Bran, too. Jaime's in the crosshairs of the two most magical POVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Fire Eater said:

But when it was called, the decision was never refuted. It wouldn't have supported Alicent since she has no claim, but Aegon II. 

Spoiler

The first Great Council was just a means to ensure a peaceful succession. Jaehaerys I did make a decision in 92 AC, but in 101 AC he lost his chosen heir and it was becoming clear that no matter who he named the other faction would not accept this - so he third son told him to call a Great Council to basically get everybody on board.

And this worked, because the Velaryons and their allies allowed themselves to be dissuaded by Viserys' overwhelming victory. But this has nothing to do with legally binding things, or anything of that sort.

Quote

That too.

It's literally in the name: Kingsguard. LC Hightower himself said "You swore a vow to guard the king not to judge him." The KG was founded specifically by Visenya, when the Dornish were sending assassins against Aegon, to protect the king. Regarding Rickard Throne and Willis Fell's case, it was part of a plan to keep the king safe, and they knew the king was safe as no one else knew his whereabouts. The war wasn't over yet. Whereas, the current situation with the three KG wasn't the plan. Viserys and the rest of the royal family on Dragonstone weren't in hiding, and their enemies clearly knew where they were, and they had lost the war with the remaining Targaryen loyalists dipping their banners.

Yet they still had a strong fleet there, and loyal men protecting them, and the men at the tower had been given commands either by King Aerys II or by Prince Rhaegar (or perhaps even by Lyanna, depending what role she had), and for one reason or another they were sticking to them. Just as Willis Fell didn't abandoned Aegon II while he was protecting Princess Jaehaera, there is no reason to believe the men at the tower being there means they abandoned Aerys II or Viserys III - or were giving some sort of political statement by doing that.

Just as Willis Fell being with Jaehaera doesn't mean he thinks a woman should be Queen Regnant or that Jaehaera was Aegon II's legal heir and successor after Prince Maelor was killed.

Quote

His marriages were accepted, and so by extension, any children he would have had through them would have been accepted as legitimate. As for Aegon, his son Aenys was by his likely second wife, Rhaenys. 

How do you know the former? When Maegor was a rotting corpse on the Iron Throne nothing was accepted this man did - and pretty much nobody listening to him in the days before that, anyway? Viserys I decreed his daughter should succeed him - did that happen? No. Maegor could have married and ape and adopted a horse for all we care - and while he was still in charge people would have nodded their heads and smiled uncomfortably -, but nobody would have treated the ape as the Queen Dowager and the horse as his successor after his death.

And it might have been similar if Maegor had left any heirs of his body from some of his later wives.

There is no indication that Rhaenys was Aegon's second wife in a temporal sense - but even if she was - you yourself point out that those marriages took place on Dragonstone before the Conquest. They are not accepted because they are done within the traditions of the Seven Kingdoms, they are accepted because they were done outside of the Seven Kingdoms and before Aegon and his sisters conquered them.

And as it happened the Conqueror was a polygamous father for only three years. And he lived 27 years as a monogamist. 

Quote

Aenys threatened for him to either set Alys aside or go into exile. Maegor went into exile, meaning his marriage to Alys wasn't invalidated. Maegor still had the precedent set by his father. 

King Aenys didn't want his brother to keep Alys Harroway - that's why he wanted Murmison to make Ceryse fertile. He hoped his brother would repent his folly. What would have happened had Aenys lived and Maegor returned after the five years we don't know. But the crucial thing here is that even Targaryen kings do not like polygamy.

If smallfolk, nobility, and royals see polygamy as vile and wrong in 282 AC as King Aenys did in 39 AC, then there is pretty much no chance that a child from such a union is seen as equal to a child from a monogamous marriage, especially not if the father involved is just a prince, and not a king ruling for nearly forty years.

Quote

Aegon married both his sisters before he was even crowned by the High Septon. Maegor took a second wife before he was crowned, and as I pointed out, his marriage wasn't technically invalidated as far as we know. As for Westerosi wedding vows, followers of the Old Gods have practiced polygamy from King Garland II of the Reach, Lord Lymond Hightower and King Ronard of Storm's End to Ygon Oldfather in the present. Blackfyre supporters also say that Aegon IV promised Daemon he could take Daenerys as a second wife, meaning there was some level of acceptance. 

Those are obscure cases from the past - and Prince Rhaegar didn't follow the old gods, anyway, and did marry his wife, Princess Elia Martell, in the Great Sept of Baelor. He would have broken the marriage vows spoken there if he had taken a second wife. And since Rhaegar had neither dragons nor a crown chances are not that great that everybody would have cheered him if he had done something like that.

Lyanna would have been a whore, just as Alys was, and any child of theirs a bastard.

Quote

What about after the War for Dawn where much of the pretenders have been killed by then leaving maybe at most 2-3? 

I don't expect there to be any conflicting pretenders around after that, aside from perhaps people one would not want to give the forum of a Great Council (like Euron) anyway. Dany and Jon can rule together if both of them live, and if one of them dies then the other can be the heir of the other - and if they both they they could have a child.

I mean, honestly, the idea that people have to actually formally discuss who should rule them after they just worked together and defeated the Others sounds like a pretty strange setting to me. Sort of like, 'Well, we got around solving the pretty big issues, the one that matter, but we can't really decide who is going to be the guy who collects out taxes?' That would be just strange.

I can see a Great Council like gathering somewhere in the middle of the story - when the threat of the Others is finally on the table and key characters try to convince other people that they have to work together now - but I don't see something like that for as insignificant a question as who should rule them.

Quote

Yes, I think Daenerys would need to recognize him for him to be truly accepted. The public story, not the actual story mentioned in a footnote by Mushroom, regarding Addam Velaryon was that mounting a dragon proved his Velaryon heritage.

That is actually not the case. The dragonriding thing helps to convince people his story is true, but the boys are only legitimized because Rhaenyra does legitimized them - and she does that only because people she trusts tell her the story.

It is Marilda of Hull, Corlys and Jacaerys Velaryon who ensure the legitimization of the Hull boys. Not some dragon. If dragons bred Velaryons or Targaryens, we would have a Hugh Velaryon, a Ulf Targaryen, and a Nettles Targaryen.

And the issue with the Jon story really is that his mother and his father are dead, and the people apparently knowing the story are not necessarily firsthand witnesses. Howland and even Wylla can at best claim to tell others what Lyanna and Ned believed to be the truth, they have no proof that Rhaegar Targaryen actually fathered Lyanna's child.

Quote

That could provide some precedent as it would prove Jon has blood of the dragon. It couldn't have come from the Stark side, and they have no knowledge of who Jon's mother is. Wylla might provide testimony, Howland Reed as well and maybe Ashara if she is still alive.

Blood of the dragon can be found anywhere. And if Ashara Dayne had some, then she could be Jon's mother and Ned his father, right?

The way things stand Dany doesn't need much convincing that the Jon story is true - she already believes Rhaegar loved Lyanna. The point is just that if she didn't want to believe it, a dragon would not have to change her mind. Especially not if Dragonbinder creates dragonriders who have not even a single drop of Targaryen blood. Which it might well do.

Quote

In the case you mentioned, it wouldn't be accepted, as there is nothing said to be special about people of Stark descent like blood of the dragon that allows them to mount dragons. The story usually has a hero prove his heritage through some seemingly impossible feat.

I don't think Jon will have to prove his heritage. I think it will be revealed or uncovered and Dany will go along with it and accept it because they are already in love, anyway.

Quote

Aerys's decree was made before Daenerys was born (she was born after he died), and didn't mention her, it referred only to Viserys.

But Viserys III was the crowned Targaryen king after his father, and he chose and named Princess Daenerys his Heir Apparent. That's obvious in AGoT.

That is going to be (one of) the card(s) Dany will play to challenge Aegon's claim.

Quote

While Rhaenyra had her father's proclamation and will specifically naming her his heir, Daenerys didn't. Tradition and precedent would have the male heir supersede the female heir. While in the case of Viserys I and Rhaenys, and Daena and Viserys II, the female claimant had a stronger claim through primogeniture, the male claimant became king. In this case, it is male claimant having a stronger claim through primogeniture. I think Daenerys would fight Aegon knowing he is fake, as I doubt she would knowingly fight her own late brother's remaining child. 

This is all pretty much irrelevant in light of the fact that Jon Snow is a nobody with no connections to House Targaryen and their followers. Even if they liked 'the male line' more, they are not just suddenly defecting in mass to another hidden prince. Dany will have time and time and time to actually build herself a proper power base while Jon cannot even hope to rival her in that. He could come to power with her, at her side, but not against her.

I mean - just think what you would do. You are, say, Mathis Rowan. You jump ships at Storm's End when the blue-haired boy is revealed to be Rhaegar's dead son. Then that turns out to be a lie, you end up switching sides again to Aerys II's confirmed daughter, the Mother of Dragons.

And then suddenly another son of Rhaegar's shows up, one you never even heard of? Give me a break. That's not going to fly. Not ever. 

Quote

That isn't fair, given most Targaryen loyalists don't even know Jon exists. The Northmen would be more likely to believe it coming from Ned's companion, Howland Reed. Reed has no reason to lie. You think the Stark supporters would abandon Ned's nephew who was raised by Ned himself in the North, and supported the fight against the Boltons and aided the Stark heirs?

If Jon had first installed as King in the North or even only Lord of Winterfell against Eddard Stark's living, breathing children (Brandon, Rickon, Sansa, Arya) then I do think this could cause some problems, yes.

It is part of the reason why I don't think Jon Snow should presume to actually end up in a kingly or even lordly leadership role in the North. Because he is not a Stark. Not through the male line at least.

Quote

It does sound impossible, I know, but in this series, the impossible can become possible, like hatching stone dragon eggs. Jon will eventually be accepted as king, or what point is there to giving him a secret royal heritage and with plenty of hints and Arthurian references if it isn't going to have a significant impact on the storyline?

I think Jon's ultimate role will have to do more with the Others than the king crap. Dany is the queen, not Jon. Jon is more a hero, not a king. A king does mundane things like ruling, a hero saves people from ice demons (and can, perhaps, die a final death in the process).

I'm sure Jon could rule as king in the end, and I'd like him and Dany rule together, but I'm not sure that's going to happen. This is not a fairy-tale. And the way it is written especially the characters who deserve it to live in the end are not going to make it.

Edited by Lord Varys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/19/2018 at 12:58 AM, Fire Eater said:

The KG are required to guard the king, and their vows would have required them to go to Dragonstone to protect the royal family if Jon was a bastard. They didn't need to be there as Dayne's family could have looked after Lyanna without the Kingsguard. Why didn't they have Dayne's family look after her so they could go to Dragonstone? No public explanation has been offered so far. 

Who says those Kingsguard were not on their way to Dragonstone when they got ambushed by Ned and his goons.  They were on their way to a friendly port in Dorne in order to take a ship to Dragonstone.   The reasons for why those men were there are endless.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Texas Hold Em said:

Who says those Kingsguard were not on their way to Dragonstone when they got ambushed by Ned and his goons.  They were on their way to a friendly port in Dorne in order to take a ship to Dragonstone.   The reasons for why those men were there are endless.  

In the dream they rather pompously claim they won't go to Dragonstone, which people often use as claiming they make a political decision there - rejecting King Viserys III in favor of some infant born to the (possible) second wife of a dead prince.

Now, FaB really puts that kind of interpretation firms to rest for any thinking person, since it is made quite clear that both

Spoiler

King Jaehaerys I and King Aegon III are only then seen and addressed as kings after they have been crowned and anointed - which basically takes months between the death of the previous king and the proper rise of the next.

We also got that in novellas drawn from FaB before. Aegon II and Rhaenyra are only styled 'King' and 'Queen' from the moment they actually had a coronation, and the same also goes for Aenys and Maegor - although here were have a 'popular proclamation/coronation' before the actual formal coronation and anointing by the hands of the High Septon - Aenys had a first coronation at the funeral of his father on Dragonstone, and the coronation in the Starry Sept. Maegor has his coronation on Dragonstone, and a year later his proper coronation and anointing in the Starry Sept.

But we already have that thing in ASoIaF, too. Prince Aegon, for instance, is not styled 'king' by his followers never mind the fact that if blood alone counted, the boy would either be king since the day his royal grandfather, Aerys II, died (which would be the weird rationale of the knights at the tower if they were rejecting Viserys III for Lyanna's son) or at least since the day Khal Drogo crowned King Viserys III in Vaes Dothrak.

But neither is the case.

If Jon Connington doesn't see his Aegon as his king yet, how on earth can anyone believe the Kingsguard at the tower saw Lyanna's infant child as their king?

A prince? Perhaps. A future king? Maybe. A pretender to the Iron Throne? At this point, no. The crowned and anointed king? Not a chance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2018 at 5:25 PM, Starkz said:

Female Targaryens come after males in the line of succession. Any of Rhaegers sons would come before Dany.

Not this time around.  Rhaegar and his sons, daughters, grandchildren have all been disinherited.  The line of succession does not go back to his line.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2018 at 9:44 AM, Lady Winter Rose said:

I'm in team Jon's a Targaryen and his parents are not wed or their marriage isn't recognized. do you think Jon be Dany's heir when she founds about Lyanna & Rhaegar

Dany is a teenager.  How many teenage girls do you know who makes choosing an heir a high priority.  My thinking on this matter is this.  Dany will go back to Slaver's Bay/Bay of Dragons/New Ghis/New Valyria or what have you.  She will leave somebody in charge before leaving Westeros.  The one who has the best chances of being chosen for this job is Aegon Connington (Griffin, Blackfyre, Targaryen, whatever his last name may be doesn't matter).  The choosing won't be determined by blood but by whether she thinks this chosen one can be trusted.  Tristane M. and Will Tyrell won't be bad considerations.  Jon has a fair chance of getting chosen but Aegon is the better pick.  Jon has too many issues and he's too sweet on the Starks to serve the realm well.  Gendry can't read.  Samwell is smart but not leadership material.  Arriane and Margery are interesting long shot candidates.  My own personal choice after Aegon is Will Tyrell.  Everything we've read of him is positive.  I wouldn't be sad if she chooses Big Walder ten years later.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Pink Letter said:

Not this time around.  Rhaegar and his sons, daughters, grandchildren have all been disinherited.  The line of succession does not go back to his line.  

They were never disinherited. Just because Viserys was named his heir doesn’t mean they were disinherited. They should have come before Viserys and with him dead they are next to inherit as Viserys had no heirs and they should have come before him if not for Aerys paranoia and Rhaegers death. The line of succession goes to males before females and as such any male Targaryen would come before Daenerys. Furthermore Viserys being the heir, after what happened to him there’s no way Dany would be his heir. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have no precedent for an older line which has been passed over to reclaim their rights with the Targaryens, so there is no example for this anybody could point to.

And Dany doesn't come with maesters and scholars and lawyers. She comes with dragons and swords. She can ignore established precedents, laws, and traditions if she wants to - and she can force people to see her arguments rather those of the other side. This is all a case by case basis. And Dany's case is pretty good considering she is not only a dragonrider, but also the Mother of Dragons, which basically makes her somewhat of a Targaryen goddess.

But in the field of claims she has a pretty strong case - she is the daughter and the sister of a king, Rhaegar's children are just royal grandchildren, farther down the line. In such cases proximity wins over primogeniture - Jaehaerys I's grandson become king, not his great-grandson, Maekar's son became king, not his grandson, and so forth.

And Dany is also the chosen heir of the last crowned Targaryen king - who also happened to be the chosen heir of the last Targaryen king on the Iron Throne. Nobody made any of Rhaegar's children heirs to the Iron Throne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wolf's Bane said:

Dany is a teenager.  How many teenage girls do you know who makes choosing an heir a high priority. 

She´s a teenage girl in a special position, though. Experience of assassination attempts, and of the fate of her Astapori followers after she moved on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 8:44 PM, Lollygag said:

Works with Bran, too. Jaime's in the crosshairs of the two most magical POVs.

There is a recent topic about this.  Bran is not going to forgive Jaime.  It would be a dull story if he did.  This is not the story of the Starks letting bygones be bygones.  Catelyn slit the throat of a harmless simpleton.  Arya killed an innocent old man who had nothing whatsoever to do with the red wedding.  She has a kill list for Pete's sake.  Jon killed Slynt the moment he got the chance.  Bran is not going to be different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×